Healthy Skepticism Library item: 20526

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Health minister recieves rational health declaration
The Lancet 1984 Jun 16; (i):1172-73

Abstract:

On June 6 a delegation of doctors and representatives of aid agencies met the Health Minister, Mr Kenneth Clarke, to present the Rational Health Declaration, which urges the Government to support the implementation of policies on essential drugs in the Third World. The Minister had previously written to Oxfam declining to receive the declaration publicly. The declaration has now been signed by over 2400 people, mainly health professionals, who have attended public meetings up and down the country. The Minister’s agreement to receive the declaration followed a series of Parliamentary questions, letters from MP’s, and an early day motion tabled in Parliament with all-party support and signed by over 160 MPs. The delegation included Sir John Crofton, emeritus professor of respiratory diseases, University of Edinburgh, Dr Andrew Herxheimer, editor of the Drug and Therapeutic Bulletin, Dr Martin Schweiger, senior registrar in community medicine, Airedale Health Authority, John Cunnington, of War on Want, and Dianna Melrose, representing Oxfam.

After the positive stance taken by British representatives at last month’s World Health Assembly1 the delegation was able to congratulate the Minister for supporting the resolution on rational use of drugs calling for more unbiased drug information and international action to curb abuses in drug marketing. Mr Clarke referred to the debate on generic prescribing in the UK and said that the Greenfield report had frightened the industry. “Doctors should prescribe generics here”, he added, and “take cost-effectiveness unto account”. One advantage would be a demonstration effect on developing countries, who imitate the UK market. He hoped that companies would shift to generics supply in the Third World, but he emphasised the limited power of the DHSS to encourage changes in marketing strategy.

Ways in which the DHSS could support implementation of the resolution on the rational use of drugs included the possibility that a British civil servant be seconded to Geneva to help overhaul the output of independent drug evaluations. But the Minister emphasised that the DHSS lacked resources to expand bilateral cooperation with developing countries’ drug regulatory agencies, as had been successfully carried out with Egyptian officals and scientists.

In response to the delegation’s concern that the USA was likely to try block progress on a WHO pharmaceuticals code, Mr Clarke pointed out that the USA was left in isolation in Geneva and that the 1985 expert meeting needed “careful handling” to have practical results. He thought the Geneva vote was likely to make the West Germans reconsider their position (they abstained, along with the Japanese, but in isolation from the rest of the EEC).

The Minister reiterated Government support for the WHO Action Programme on Essential Drugs and for moves to set up a UK-funded pilot project to improve drug distribution and training in a developing country. He hoped that Britian would in future act as one of the more positive countries. He acknowledged the role of played by Rational Health Campaign since publication by Oxfam of Bitter Pills which contained some “well-founded criticism” of drug marketing and supply. The DHSS had had a “feeling of being towed along”. But they were happy to have been towed along and had cooperated more closely with the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) in preparation for the World Health Assembly.